EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 9554
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18857 Posts
| ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On December 19 2017 01:53 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: What do you mean by this? It sounds like you're saying it's very common for liberals to not give potential allies a chance and preemptively hate on them or dismiss them, more frequently than conservatives (or a different political group) might jump to conclusions about these kinds of things. What other examples do you have of this that would make this a serious stereotype for Democrats? From what I've seen with Obama and some other Democratic leaders, their idealism often times makes them more open to seeking bipartisan compromise or at least welcoming more people into the conversation (for better or for worse), which I feel isn't consistent with your statement that rejecting potential allies is a "classic liberal" move. Not even pre-emptively, just in general. Liberals tend to have fairly exacting standards for their politicians and representatives. High standards, or the acknowledgement that these people could be better or mess up, is not a bad thing - it's a good thing really. However, when it runs up against reality and practicality, like Manchin in WV, Bel Edwards in LA or Jones in AL, it's not helpful. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On a more serious notice, that sucks, but is not necessarily down to bad infrastructure. Train tracks in germany are decently maintained, and we had one of the biggest train incidents in the last few decades (ICE derailed and hit a bridge at 125mp/h because the outer rim of a wheel broke, 101 dead). It's very possible that something similar happened on that train. Not that i'd be against any infrastructure funding, just pointing out that it could very well be amtraks fault for cheaping out on a part (they work profit oriented, although they receive government funding, if i understand correctly?). | ||
|
KOFgokuon
United States14911 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15743 Posts
On December 19 2017 02:29 Nevuk wrote: Wow, I had been meaning to take this train. Maybe I just won't. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On December 19 2017 02:33 farvacola wrote: Good thing we're prioritizing infrastructure spending and finding the money to pay for it....oh wait.... Good thing #Resist doesn’t have bad side effects...oh wait... | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 19 2017 02:52 Danglars wrote: Good thing #Resist doesn’t have bad side effects...oh wait... What side effects would those be? Infrastructure was never going to be supported by conservative Republicans. That involves spending money on goverment things. | ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
On December 19 2017 02:52 Danglars wrote: Good thing #Resist doesn’t have bad side effects...oh wait... What the fuck are you talking about? Like really, lets have you explain this one | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On December 19 2017 02:52 Plansix wrote: From my understanding, if we had more trains and more train lines, the costs would go down. But there are so few trains and train lines. Clearly it's a somewhat uniquely American issue right, for the shorter lines at least? In my experiences in Europe medium distance train rides (few hours) cost significantly less. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10884 Posts
| ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On December 19 2017 02:54 Logo wrote: Clearly it's a somewhat uniquely American issue right, for the shorter lines at least? In my experiences in Europe medium distance train rides (few hours) cost significantly less. From Duesseldorf to Berlin (it's around 60 minutes of flight, 400miles maybe), it's a quarter of the train fare, the ICE is ridiculously expensive, especially on short notice. You CAN get cheap train fare, but that requires planning in advance, making use of all the programs/discounts and strings attached, to the point where it's idiotic to use the train for price reasons (it has other upsides though). Good thing #Resist doesn’t have bad side effects...oh wait... Called it. Literally two posts above yours, jesus christ you guys are predictable it's not even funny. | ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
On December 19 2017 02:57 Nevuk wrote: I thought a large part of why america has so little train infrastructure was due to people still being pissed off about robber barons over a century later One reason we have less trains in cities is because of car companies lobbying for Freeways instead of public transit (At least in LA) | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 19 2017 02:59 IyMoon wrote: One reason we have less trains in cities is because of car companies lobbying for Freeways instead of public transit (At least in LA) Also our nation is fucking huge(like seriously, we are as big as all Europe and then some) and we need a feeway system. We need both, but never re-invested in trains. Many of our train lines are single rail line too. From my understanding, that is the big differences between US and the EU train systems. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On December 19 2017 03:01 Plansix wrote: Also our nation is fucking huge(like seriously, we are as big as all Europe and then some) and we need a feeway system. We need both, but never re-invested in trains. Many of our train lines are single rail line too. From my understanding, that is the big differences between US and the EU. What do you mean by single rail line, a single train going back and forth on the same track? | ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On December 19 2017 03:02 m4ini wrote: What do you mean by single rail line, a single train going back and forth on the same track? Yes. With stop off points for trains to pass each other. I guess for large sections of our train system it exists like this, even in heavily trafficked areas. The EU's train systems are just far more modern in design and track lay out. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On December 19 2017 02:52 Danglars wrote: Good thing #Resist doesn’t have bad side effects...oh wait... i have no idea what this means | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On December 19 2017 03:05 Plansix wrote: Yes. With stop off points for trains to pass each other. I guess for large sections of our train system it exists like this, even in heavily trafficked areas. The EU's train systems are just far more modern in design and track lay out. These kind of systems only exist in remote small communities where you don't need huge capacity for commuting etc. It seems weird to me, everywhere else in the world where you have to move a lot of people, you have a great rail system. Not necessarily the most convenient thing in the world (i wouldn't want to use japanese tubes etc, i hate crowded places with passion), but gets the job done. Next to a good freeway/highway/autobahn/wangan system, these are not mutually exclusive. I do understand that from state to state it's a bit harder (although we do have international train transport in europe too), but the issue isn't just there. edit: that being said, just to whine a little bit, the US system sounds a lot like the british rail system. At least in wales, it's atrocious and the most clunky/inconvenient piece of work i've ever seen. And of course, all diesel, so you get cancer while you freeze your balls off waiting on a train that has a high chance of being late/flat out cancelled. | ||
| ||
